Football Field: Presenting a Valuation Range

Football field valuation is a chart that presents valuation ranges from multiple methodologies, usually comparable companies, precedent transactions, DCF, and sometimes 52-week trading range or analyst price targets. The point is not to find one exact value. The point is to show where methods overlap, where they diverge, and what valuation range is defensible for a client discussion. Wall Street Prep describes a football field chart as a common investment banking output used to compare valuation methodologies side by side. In interviews, this is the synthesis capstone after comps, precedents, and DCF.

TL;DR

• A football field shows valuation ranges from several methods on one chart.
• Comps reflect public-market trading values; precedents reflect control transaction values.
• DCF reflects intrinsic value based on cash flow and discount-rate assumptions.
• The output is a range, not a single number.
• The best answer explains why methods differ, not just how to calculate them.

What is a football field valuation?

A football field valuation is a summary exhibit that lines up valuation ranges from different methods. Each method produces a low and high value, often based on selected multiples or sensitivities. The ranges are plotted as horizontal bars, so the chart visually resembles lines on a football field. Bankers use it in pitch books, fairness analyses, and transaction discussions because clients need to see a defensible range rather than a single fragile estimate. The chart also makes outliers obvious: if one method is far above every other method, the banker needs to explain why.

Which methods go into a football field?

The standard methods are comparable company analysis, precedent transactions, DCF, and sometimes market reference points. Use methods that fit the company and assignment. For a public company, 52-week trading range and analyst targets may be relevant. For a private company, those may not apply.

Method	What it reflects	Typical range driver
Comparable companies	Current public-market value	EV/EBITDA or P/E multiple range
Precedent transactions	M&A control value	Deal multiple range
DCF	Intrinsic value	WACC, growth, or exit multiple sensitivity
52-week range	Public trading history	Low and high share price
Analyst targets	Equity research view	Published target-price range

How do you build the range?

For each method, calculate a low and high valuation. In comps, apply a selected multiple range to the target's metric. In precedents, apply transaction multiple ranges, usually with care because deals include control premiums and market timing. In DCF, use sensitivity analysis to produce low and high enterprise values. Then bridge enterprise value to equity value and implied share price if needed. The final chart should use consistent units: enterprise value, equity value, or share price. Mixing units is a common mistake.

What is a worked example?

Suppose a company has 100 million dollars of EBITDA and 50 million diluted shares. Net debt is 200 million dollars. Comps suggest 8.0x to 10.0x EBITDA, precedents suggest 9.0x to 11.0x, and DCF suggests 850 million to 1,050 million dollars of enterprise value.

$\text{Implied Share Price} = \frac{\text{Enterprise Value} - \text{Net Debt}}{\text{Diluted Shares}}$

Method	Enterprise value range	Equity value range	Share price range
Comps	800M to 1,000M	600M to 800M	12 to 16 dollars
Precedents	900M to 1,100M	700M to 900M	14 to 18 dollars
DCF	850M to 1,050M	650M to 850M	13 to 17 dollars

The broad defensible share-price range is roughly 12 to 18 dollars, but the overlapping core range is 14 to 16 dollars. That overlap is usually more useful than mechanically averaging every endpoint.

How do you explain the output in an interview?

Say that a football field triangulates valuation rather than declaring one method correct. Comps may be lower if public markets are weak. Precedents may be higher because buyers pay control premiums. DCF may be wider because it depends heavily on WACC and terminal value. A strong answer also notes that the final recommendation depends on context. In a sell-side pitch, you may emphasize buyer appetite and precedents. In a fairness opinion, you may be more careful about methodological support. In a trading analysis, comps and unaffected share price may matter more.

When ranges overlap, point to the overlap first. In the example above, 14 to 16 dollars is where all 3 methods have support, even though the full outer range is 12 to 18 dollars. That does not mean the company is "worth" exactly 15 dollars. It means a client discussion can start with the supported overlap, then widen or narrow based on control premium, market conditions, growth quality, and negotiation leverage.

That is the judgment piece interviewers want most.

Frequently Asked Questions

Why is it called a football field?

Because the valuation ranges are shown as horizontal bars that resemble yard lines on a football field.

Is a football field a valuation method?

No. It is a presentation of several valuation methods. The underlying methods are comps, precedents, DCF, trading range, and other analyses.

Which valuation method should receive the most weight?

It depends on the company and assignment. DCF may matter more for stable cash-flow businesses, comps for public-market benchmarking, and precedents for M&A negotiation context.

Should you average the football field ranges?

Not mechanically. Averaging can hide method quality. Explain the overlap and the reasons one method may deserve more weight.

Should the chart show enterprise value or share price?

Use the metric that fits the discussion and keep it consistent. Public-company boards often care about implied share price; transaction teams may focus on enterprise value.

Sources

• Corporate Finance Institute, "Football Field Chart": https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/valuation/football-field-chart/ (checked July 2026)
• Wall Street Prep, "Comparable Company Analysis": https://www.wallstreetprep.com/knowledge/comparable-company-analysis-comps/ (checked July 2026)